More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Carl Pope

Carl Pope

GET UPDATES FROM Carl Pope

Trade, Islands, and Diversity

Posted: 04/12/11 02:48 PM ET

Delice, Dominica -- The Carib name for this island was Waitukubuli: "Her body is tall." And, small as this island is, it still stands tall. On short notice, Dominica can assemble -- with a population of only 70,000 -- an impressive group of 15 environmental and sustainability leaders and activists to brainstorm with me. I was told a group of 100 could just as easily have been assembled. But that density reflects the particular vulnerability and price this island has paid for the emergence of the global neo-liberal trade regime -- the World Trade Organization (WTO) and its brethren.

Bananas here were "yellow gold." The island was fertile, the fruit was excellent, and England provided a secure market. But with the WTO, that market was no longer secure, and United Fruit Company (Chiquita bananas) drove higher-quality Dominican bananas from the British market -- empowered by UFC's economies of scale and global trade rules that put price above everything.*

If you are over 50, incidentally, and think that bananas tasted better when you were young, you are right. The bananas of your youth -- a single variety, the Gros Michel, which UFC made virtually the only banana sold in the U.S. -- were wiped out in 1960 by a fungus -- the perils of monoculture. UFC had to replace them with an inferior variety, the Cavendish, whose global scale has guaranteed that it, too, is on the verge of meeting its Waterloo in the form of Panama disease. It will be replaced by a still less tasty variety. Still certain globalism makes life better?

But bananas are not the only example of how neo-liberal trade rules are bad news for small places -- and indeed for diversity and small niches in all their forms. Vanilla was Dominica's "black gold," but when artificial vanilla temporarily flooded global markets, Dominican farmers couldn't sell their crop, and stopped growing it -- although today the price has recovered. Limes here were wiped out by a virus almost a century ago -- it took years to find a resistant variety, but by then the local supply chain had withered. There are mechanisms, lots of them, that a government can use to protect the diversity of small scale, artisanal agriculture from the volatility of global commodity prices and diseases. But almost all of them are illegal under WTO rules, because they require favoring local production over global and take into account not only price but also how commodities are grown or produced.

Indeed, Dominica is an almost perfect challenge to conventional theories of free trade. Because of its tiny size, it has a competitive advantage -- in the sense of being able to make something cheaper -- in absolutely nothing. It will never produce the world's cheapest banana, cheapest lime, or cheapest vanilla. In fact, the island still has an old Colgate-Palmolive factory that once processed local coconuts into copra, cosmetics, soaps, etc. It still operates -- but the raw materials come from the Philippines -- because that's cheaper than processing local coconuts (which, for the record, grow free). But just the cost of transporting them over windy mountain roads to the factory makes local coconuts uncompetitive.

What Dominica could do is produce the world's best version of certain crops. But "best" would need to include factors like lack of pesticides, decent wages, and reasonable environmental standards -- all things the WTO prohibits its members from taking into consideration.

When the Dominican banana market collapsed, something else happened. Half the island's population migrated -- mostly to the United States. So in the pre-WTO world, British distributors paid a little more for bananas, farmers on this island sent their kids to college on yellow gold, there was a deeper potential for recovering from disease, and Dominicans got to live in their Dominica. In the post-WTO world: no Dominican bananas, poor Dominican families, bananas slightly cheaper (but shortly to become much less tasty), and tens of thousands of Dominican refugees still pouring into New York.

Still certain "free trade" makes the world better? Come enjoy Dominica and see if you still feel that way.

*Correction: In my previous post I mistakenly said that Chiquita drove Dominican bananas from the U.S. market -- not, as was actually the case, the UK market.

 
 
 

Follow Carl Pope on Twitter: www.twitter.com/CarlPope

 
 
  • Comments
  • 8
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Recency  | 
Popularity
08:24 PM on 04/14/2011
trade is a reflection of both the quantity of goods produced as well as the goods not locally produced and a country's commercial policy is connected to it's trading policy and a country's trading policy is connected to it's level of economic development and so it is foolish on our part(Dominica) to use one policy as to be universally applicable. free trade is foolish if we cannot protect our infants industries against the more mature products and services of the industrial centers or against relatively more advanced economies. the United States did it(Alexander Hamilton), Great Briton did it, Germany, France-they all did it when it suited them and it's that simple. but i guess might is right or should we be optimistic as Abraham Lincoln was when he said "let us pray humbly that right makes might."
05:40 PM on 04/13/2011
Carl - I have never seen or heard of a Dominica Refugee.
12:44 PM on 04/13/2011
One visit to Dominica to taste a Dominican bananna guava mango or grapefruit (the list could go on forever) and one will know that free trade is not the way to go. Its time for the world to realize that its time to rethink the authority of WTO if not for quality of life in the Caribbean, for food quality through out the world.
08:13 AM on 04/14/2011
I fully agree that the WTO way makes no sense and completely ignores the needs of Small Island States in the Caribbean . We now need to demand changes to the WTO rules in order to stop what is the exploitation of farmers and primary producers. I therefore call on governments in the ACP grouping to setup the necessary organisation to meet this demand for Fair Trade.
05:02 PM on 04/12/2011
Free trade is destroying global agriculture and is putting us all at risk. Free trade needs to be stopped - it is never free and fair. And the WTO needs to be ashamed!
photo
Scholastica8
PEOPLE MATTER!
04:23 PM on 04/12/2011
I think the term "neo-Liberal" is misleading. It has political connotations that immediately makes one jump to the Democrats. I say this as a Republican.

The power that now dominated global economy & world trade is comprised of Global Robber Barons... the giant corporations that have bought all the political parties in all countries. They don't care who they pay off, just so they get what they want.

Therefore, it is misleading to suggest that it is any one party. It is the control of all parties, even when their constituency might believe otherwise. They toss the little guys who make up the base a few social bones & be done with it... back to tearing down unions, environmental & health laws, etc. What do they care about climate change? They'll find a way to make a profit from it.... & everyone else can fend for themselves as best they can, if they can at all.
photo
indabush
Experience is what every one calls their mistakes
05:45 PM on 04/13/2011
slight correction....bananas met their demise under the Clinton administration...prior to that, there was a drop, albeit not a significant one, because the EU, in an effort to avert a forthcoming US lawsuit as well as maintaining some degree of protection for small farmers throughout the ACP countries (African, Caribbean and Pacific), continued to give some protection for these small farmers. It wasn't however, until Bill Clinton, his election coffers laden with Chiquita money, took the European countries to the WTO court in order to dismantle the EU banana regime did Dominica and other ACP farmers lose the battle. I know - i was part of that battle. I cannot forget when Bill Clinton came to the islands, smiling and grinning and patting us on our backs saying how great a friend we are to America, and at the same time he was sticking it to us. I was very young and naive at the time and i adored Clinton, but that two-faced strategy of his was an eye-opener - i have never look at the man the same way since.
absolument
Debate the policy. But first, LEARN the science.
11:24 PM on 04/14/2011
It doesn't even matter if you're Democrat or Republican, conservative or liberal. You can go all the way back to Adam Smith and Thomas Jefferson, and the term "neo-liberal" is still deceptive. It's an intentionally deceptive "school" of economic "thought" which is not an updated or newer version of what it really means to be Liberal. It has nothing to do with Liberal political thought. "Neo-liberalism" is Milton Friedman's financial anarchism. It has nothing to do with ANY civilized political philosophy.